Blaze collapses Michigan Firehouse

Did you guys read this? That's pretty bad news for all involved, but mostly for the injured firefighter - he's going to have a long road to recovery ahead of him with the amount of burns he received. My prayers are definately with him.

Did you guys read this? That's pretty bad news for all involved, but mostly for the injured firefighter - he's going to have a long road to recovery ahead of him with the amount of burns he received. My prayers are definately with him.

This brings up the old argument though and a very valid point - we preach smoke detectors to the public, yet a large majority of Fire Houses still dont have this early warning device????? Im bamboozled as to why, especially after an accident like this!

This brings up the old argument though and a very valid point - we preach smoke detectors to the public, yet a large majority of Fire Houses still dont have this early warning device????? Im bamboozled as to why, especially after an accident like this!

Dave,

I understand that this was a volunteer department and the station house it self was possibly unstaffed at the time of the fire. Does anyone have any information to verify this? The point being that a smoke detector would have done nothing to help an empty building, although a fire alarm might have.

I understand that this was a volunteer department and the station house it self was possibly unstaffed at the time of the fire. Does anyone have any information to verify this? The point being that a smoke detector would have done nothing to help an empty building, although a fire alarm might have.

This is an incerdibly ignorant statement. IF the building is going to unmanned most of the time, there are several alternatives:

1. Central Station monitoring
2. Dialer to several FD members
3. Audible alarm on the exterior of the building.

"WAH, WAH, WAH, these things cost money."

The fire house and the equipment in it are the most expensive and possibly most essential pieces of critical infrastructure that a town, township, county, whatever, owns. It is completely irresponsible to suggest that appropriate fire detection and protection is a minor issue.

Let me say that I, too, have held off in posting about smoke detectors. This post is not adderssed to this incident, but to the issue of fire protection in fire department facilities in general.

Why, George! Thanks, at least if I'm going to be ignorant I'm glad I can incredible at it! And just for the record - I don't know the inner workings of volunteer departments as we do not have them in our county. I would love to learn more, however, which is why I asked for verification.

Originally Posted by GeorgeWendtCFI

1. Central Station monitoring
2. Dialer to several FD members
3. Audible alarm on the exterior of the building.

Ummmm....isn't that what I said? "The point being that a smoke detector would have done nothing to help an empty building, although a fire alarm might have."

Originally Posted by GeorgeWendtCFI

"WAH, WAH, WAH, these things cost money."

The fire house and the equipment in it are the most expensive and possibly most essential pieces of critical infrastructure that a town, township, county, whatever, owns. It is completely irresponsible to suggest that appropriate fire detection and protection is a minor issue.

Let me say that I, too, have held off in posting about smoke detectors. This post is not adderssed to this incident, but to the issue of fire protection in fire department facilities in general."

I also never said the injury to this firefighter couldn't have been avoided, but I felt that it was possible that some might think these ff's were actually in the house at the time the fire broke out. I'm not even sure myself, again, why I asked for anyone who knew to verify or deny this particular piece of the puzzle.

This article was written with a lot of holes in it. Was there smoke detection? If I had to guess I'd say not, seeing as how the fire was "detected by passersby". Was anyone in the building when it started? It does not say one way or the other although I am inclined to believe that no one was.

I have also never disregarded the value and cost of equipment, especially in a district where the main service is totally volunteer. From what I have seen they seem to work very hard to acquire the apparatus and stations that they have.

But most importantly I never, ever - not even once - stated that appropriate fire protection nor detection was a minor issue. I did, however, say that in this particular instance a fire alarm system would have helped in preventing injuries to firefighters while a smoke detector would have gone off to an empty building.

It's my opinion, since you've asked, that smoke detectors are great - if they are cared for. Whether building commercial or residential buildings I think that it should be required that they install smoke detectors that are hard wired, that do not require batteries that should be changed and never are and maintenance that is never done. Sprinklers are even more important. For the minimal cost to put them into a home under construction - why are they not required?

How many times have you heard of fatalities in fires where there were smoke detectors but they were "unoperational" at the time of the fire? That is irreponsible.

No George, it doesn't. Having been on duty last night and having about two hours of sleep when I made that statement, I didn't correctly explain my position. Buy I thank you for pointing that out to me. I apologize. It won't happen again.

I appreciate the lack of yelling and sceraming. I might hurt myself trying to sceram back while I spin

Not a career/vollie issue. I agree - I never said that it was. What I did say, however, is that I had no personal knowledge of volunteer departments, how they are staffed, manned nor anything about station protection or lack thereof of any department other than my own.

Who gives a **** if the station is unmanned - MOST fire stations are unmanned when there is a call, fuel run, food run, training, etc. Very, very few departments leave a "watchman" or similiar position back at the station.

That's an excellent point which I had not considered. Again, a good point to make for what I said in the beginning, which was "fire alarms".

Great, career department. Station just burned down 'cause we left the dinner cooking.

Like George said...Sprinklers. Monitored Fire Alarms. Or, at the very least, hook up a smoke detector to trigger an air raid siren.

If you had read my post in full you would have understood that I simply did not fully explain myself in my original post. Although, again, I believe my words were "fire alarm"... Not to mention that in both posts I agreed completely with the above statement.

Let me state again so that there is no mistaking my intent:

I believe that fire stations should have fire detection and protection systems. Having said that - I also believe that this particular ff - the ff about which I was speaking and the particular situation that I was referring to - would not IN THIS SITUATION have benefitted from a smoke detector, ((AGAIN - I AM NOT SAYING THAT SMOKE DETECTORS SHOULD NOT BE INSTALLED IN FIRE HOUSES)) which would NOT NOTIFY ANYONE of the fire except the occupants of that particular building. Because they did not have FIRE ALARM this ff was hurt...bottom line.

Jeez.....someone could lose an eye with all the knives flying. Let me jump right in ---

Advocating protection for fire stations is something that a few people here have voiced support for over the years. I agree with them. When I was the Fire Marshal on more than one occasion I received calls from an angry citizen who was apoplectic because said person found out that our city stations did not have fire protection devices (smoke detectorsprinklers, etc.) Normally the procedure was to talk them down and try to give the official line - which was BS - but hey-somebody has to tell it. It was hypocritical. All stations, and I think we are agreed, should have smoke detectors at a minimum but to show the seriousness of our chosen vocation we should seek to provide the maximum for the stations.

With respect to the youngster from Michigan who knows what might have saved his life? I can't say because I know next to nothing about it. Its a tragedy just as any firefighter losing their life is...

Ember, I thought your point came across just fine the first time. You could wear out ten keyboards trying to debate micro-semantics here. Wait til you've reached xxxx posts, then your word will be "gospel".

George - Dude relax Emberxx's point was not ignorant. It was that smoke
detectors would not help but a fire alarm would. This does not
sound like the George that I have been listening to on these forums.

George and Emberxx -
George wrote - "Let me say that I, too, have held off in posting about smoke detectors. This post is not adderssed to this incident, but to the issue of fire protection in fire department facilities in general." If you want to talk about the issue of fire protection but not addressed to this incident then start a new thread.

JackTee - Do you think the kevlar will help protect me from the knives ?

George Wendt is a straight shooter. He may rattle a few cages but he makes excellent points. EmberXX also made some good points.

Hell, so did I. Where's my certificate?

I believe he is also, that is why I was suprised at his "ignorant" comment about Emberxx's comment. I think he is right with his comments with the exception of that one.
I agree with George on the wah! wah! about costing money for fire alarm systems, but right or wrong everyone has their priorities. If the council or township board or whoever has been told they should have one, and the firehouse burns down, I sure don't want to hear any whining about it.